Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
STATION
MSNBCW 6
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 10
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
the tax cut at a million. here is what he wants to do. an increase in the individual income tax rate for the affluent may be unavoileable. obama did spend the last two years proselytizing for such a hike and voters were well aware of it when they re-elected him. but the white house has said that the rates don't have to return to clinton era levels. obama's nemesis as he often told us are millionaires and billionaires. so why not urge that the higher tax rates be applied only to those with incomes of $1 million and not the couples earning more than $250,000. now, i'm talking pure politics, not equity in this case. can they hang their hat on the fact, okay, you're against millionaires, we'll take back their cut for the millionaires? below that they have to get the deal. >> the problem with this is chuck schumer and other senate democrats tried to offer this to republicans last time. remember the last time we did this they rejected it. >> it works for them now. they can say all we want is the schumer deal. >> right now they don't have the leverage to get the schumer deal. they rejected
they are defending -- keeping the current tax rates for the wealthy. at the end of the day president obama is selling a simple message, i want to keep taxes low for middle class americans, and republicans look like -- i'm worried they're in the position of looking this, if they don't care about the middle class and want to keep tax rates low for wealthier americans. >> yes or no, is he right? yes or no? >> i don't think so. it's far too easy. >> he's right. democratic strategists are giddy. for two years they've been trying to make this argument, the republicans are going to hold up -- >> let me go back. i think he's wrong. i think ultimately if we don't get a deal, it's bad for president obama, bad for his legacy, and bad for democrats. >> i think you're right, but i also think that your party lost this election, they should act accordingly, and they're not doing it. >> john boehner didn't lose. john boehner still -- >> that is exactly where you're all screwed up. you know, when tip o'neill was speaker with a lot more seats than you guys have, he never claimed he had a national mandate because he sa
not raise tax rates. now republicans are pointing back to july 2011. this statement by president obama. >> yes, said give us $1.# trillion in additional revenues that could be accomplished without hiking tax rates, but could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes. eliminating deductions. and engaging in a tax reform process that could lowered rates generally while broadening the base. >> bret: the white house is saying it's out of context but not specifically how out of context. bring in the panel. steve hayes for "weekly standard." kirsten powers for daily beast. syndicated columnist, charles krauthammer. charles? >> look, i love when the president says we need conceptual break through. meaning the republicans have to accept a hike in rates. what he means is a political surrender. because there is no economic reason why you cannot raise the money he wants raised. by doing it through eliminating deductions, inclusions and credit. number one as we saw he, himself, said so. a year-and-a-half ago. secondly, the same debt reduction commission he appointed and then ignored. spoke a
holding the pen when he wrote, "i will not raise rates" in that letter he sent to president obama. but the problem is, we can agree or disagree with the president's position. i honestly take the president at his word. i do not believe there will be a deal here without some increase in tax rates for the top 2%. it doesn't have to be all of it, but some of it. i think the president has changed his tune a bit from the way he's handled some of these other negotiations. and take everything you say and turn it around. boehner and the republicans have to be aware of where obama's at in his own head and with his colleagues, which is no deal without some increase in rates, or we go over the cliff. >> let me just add one thing. when obama made that initial offer, we talked a little bit about how, you know, it was a wish list. it was ideological, whatever you want to say. i think it actually helped boehner in some respects because it gave him three or four things that he could then go back to his caucus and say, look, i moved obama off of this, this and this. and when boehner put his offer o
and entitlements that i'm prepared to make, that we're going to have to see the rates on the top 2% go up. and we'reling going to be able to get a deal without it. >> speaker boehner's counter offer yesterday to president obama which included a mythical increase in tax revenue of $800 billion obtained by reducing or eliminating unspecified tax deductions was taken seriously by no one in the senate except republican jim demipt. speaker boehner's $800 billion tax hike will destroy american jobs. the heritage foundation skewered the boehner counteroffer on its blog. at first blush, it appears little more than categorical preemptive capitulation. to be fair, the details of the republican proposal are extraordinarily vague to the extent it can be interpreted from the hazy details that it is utterly unacceptable. president obama said today there is a time and a place to discuss reforming the tax code. but that time is not now. >> what i've suggested is let's put a down payment on taxes, let's let tax rates on the upper income folks go up. let's let those go up. and then let's set up a process with a ti
tweeted breaks for middle class important for families and economy. if top rates don't go up, danger that middle class deductions get hit. and he signed the tweet b.o. we mean, everybody, the president, barack obama, actually wrote that one. our money embroiled in fiscal cliff. >>> still ahead on "starting point," what's next for hillary clinton when she leaves the administration. mayor clinton? >> probably not. >> new york city is looking for a mayor. >> maybe something with a little more beach front property the next few years before thinking about iowa. >> i don't know. you're watching "starting point." we'll take some guesses. 0 calor? your world. ♪ [ whispers ] real bacon... creamy cheese... 100 calories... [ chef ] ma'am [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. when you take a closer look... ...at the best schools in the world... ...you see they all have something very interesting in common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's inv
excess thoughts. okay. all right. the president on this whole fiscal cliff. >> obama: i don't think it is acceptable for you for a handful of republicans in congress to hold middle class tax cuts hostage simply because they don't want tax rates on upper income folks to go up. >> stephanie: uh, yeah! let's go to kathy in mobile, alabama. >> mobile. >> caller: actually, it is mobile. i know you're not from the south. something i've heard recently which is totally stupid was someone made the comment that normally we only work 25 years and then we live only 40 years after that. a. >> stephanie: right. >> caller: which is crazy. if you started at 18, you reach retirement at 43 or even if you start working at 35. >> stephanie: this is something grover norquist said yesterday. i'm like who only works 25 years? math is -- that's what the president said. republicans have to stop using political math to say how much they're willing to raise tax rates on the wealthiest 2% and specify the spending cuts. they're
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)